historical development Jonathan Geary, University of Arizona - PDF document

7/13/2019 The Piipaash word for ‘coyote’ as a window into Yuman historical development Jonathan Geary, University of Arizona jonathangeary@email.arizona.edu http://u.arizona.edu/~jonathangeary/ SSILA Summer Meeting 2019 July 13, 2019 1 Special thanks to……… • The Piipaash Elders and the broader Piipaash community for having shared their language with me. • Skye Anderson • Luis Barragan • Amy Fountain • Max Mulé • John Powell • Kelly Washington 2 2 1

7/13/2019 Introduction • I hypothesize that the Piipaash word xatlywe / xatʎwe/ ‘coyote’ derives from historical reflexes of two independent morphemes: xat /xat/ < /*xat/ ‘dog’ and lyvii - / ʎviː -/ < /* ʎwi ( ː )- / ‘be like, look like’. • That is, xatlywe more literally refers to something which ‘looks like a dog’. • This is supported by the use of xatlywe in archival materials, wherein Piipaash speakers extend it to other Canidae , namely ‘fox’ and ‘wolf’. • I show that other Yuman languages similarly derive a common name for ‘coyote’ from that for ‘dog’, which is distinct from the name of mythic Coyote. • The /v/ of lyvii- reflects a shift from Proto-Yuman /*w/ > River /v/. Xatlywe became lexically frozen prior to this shift, hence the retention of /w/. • Xatlywe provides evidence for the direction of the proposed shift, which both is rare cross-linguistically and has had important historical implications. 3 3 Piipaash • Piipaash (mrc; 33.51, - 111.75) (also spelled “Pee Posh”; a.k.a. Maricopa) is a Yuman language spoken near Phoenix, AZ (Ethnologue s.v. “Maricopa”) . • Yuman languages are today spoken in Arizona, California, and Baja California. • Together with Mojave (mov; 34.89, -114.6) and Quechan (yum; 32.79, -114.6) , Piipaash forms the River subbranch of the Yuman family (e.g. Miller 2018) . Figure 1. Yuman language family tree (based on Miller 2018). 4 4 2

7/13/2019 Piipaash • Piipaash (mrc; 33.51, - 111.75) (also spelled “Pee Posh”; a.k.a. Maricopa) is a Yuman language spoken near Phoenix, AZ (Ethnologue s.v. “Maricopa”) . • Yuman languages are today spoken in Arizona, California, and Baja California. • Together with Mojave (mov; 34.89, -114.6) and Quechan (yum; 32.79, -114.6) , Piipaash forms the River subbranch of the Yuman family (e.g. Miller 2018) . • The U.S. Census Bureau estimated that there were 35 speakers of “ Cocomaricopa ” in 2015. However, more recent estimates place the number of speakers much lower (e.g. SRPMIC Cultural Resources Department, n.d.). • Community members are fluent in English, some also in Akimel O’odham (Uto -Aztecan). • Revitalization efforts are ongoing at both the Salt River Pima- Maricopa Indian Community’s O’odham Piipaash Language Program and the Gila River Indian Community. 5 5 Observations from archival materials House sparrow Cactus wren • The names for flora and fauna are occasionally glossed inconsistently in archival materials: they may be inconsistent across speakers/fieldnotes, or inconsistent with how today’s speakers use the same words. • Some of these inconsistencies reflect misidentifications, most likely on the part of the linguist, who may be unfamiliar with the local wildlife and/or unable to make the relevant connections (e.g. Rea 2007: xvi-xvii) . 1 • Whereas Langdon et al. (1991) and others have recorded xnvchiip as ‘small sparrow’, Spier (1946: 113) glosses the same word as ‘cactus wren (?)’. • James Crawford (1962) worked with one speaker who identified chyer ‘bird’ as ‘ bluejay ’. • But some of these inconsistencies reflect legitimate differences in how speakers of the past used these words, and these differences can provide valuable insights into how Piipaash has changed over time……… 1 In respect of Piipaash customs which prohibit using the names of the deceased, I refer to the linguists who collected these notes instead. 6 6 3

7/13/2019 The ‘coyote’ problem Wikimedia Commons • In modern Piipaash, xatlywe / xatʎwe / is used only as the common name for ‘coyote’ (Langdon et al. 1991) . However, archival materials attest to this name being extended to ‘fox’ and ‘wolf’ as well. • In field notes dating from 1929 to the early 1960s (collected by James Crawford, Judy Crawford, Alfred Kroeber, and Leslie Spier) xatlywe is glossed as ‘fox’ either in addition to or in place of ‘coyote’ a number of times. • Additionally, at least two speakers are attested as having used xatlywe as a generic term for ‘coyote, fox, and wolf’ (Spier 1946: 105; Alpher 1970) . • cf. modern Piipaash qoqo / mkwe ‘fox’, xatkuuly ‘wolf’ (Langdon et al. 1991). • This latter grouping includes all of the major Canidae which Piipaash speakers would have been familiar with, with the exception of xat ‘dog’. 7 7 The ‘coyote’ problem Wikimedia Commons • Why are speakers attested as having used xatlywe historically for ‘fox’ and ‘wolf’, in addition to ‘coyote’? There are two possibilities: 1. These are mistakes. Someone involved in recording these materials must have misidentified xatlywe as ‘fox, wolf’. • Spier thought so: Near the end of his notes (1929-1930), he wrote that earlier glosses of xatlywe needed to be corrected from ‘fox’ to ‘coyote’. • 2. These are valid uses of xatlywe . Historically it served as a generic term for non-dog Canidae , with its meaning narrowing to ‘coyote’ over time. 8 8 4

7/13/2019 The ‘coyote’ problem Wikimedia Commons • Why are speakers attested as having used xatlywe historically for ‘fox’ and ‘wolf’, in addition to ‘coyote’? There are two possibilities: 1. These are mistakes. Someone involved in recording these materials must have misidentified xatlywe as ‘fox, wolf’. • Spier thought so: Near the end of his notes (1929-1930), he wrote that earlier glosses of xatlywe needed to be corrected from ‘fox’ to ‘coyote’. • BUT! Coyote is an important character in Piipaash folklore (e.g. Spier 1933) . • AND! Coyotes are not uncommon in the Southwest. It would be strange for Piipaash speakers or even American linguists to misidentify them……… 2. These are valid uses of xatlywe . Historically it served as a generic term for non-dog Canidae , with its meaning narrowing to ‘coyote’ over time. 9 9 Two observations about xatlywe 1. The mythic character Coyote has a different name which is unrelated to the common name xatlywe (Spier 1933: 353; Wares 1968: 81; Alpher 1970) . • This is true in other Yuman communities, such as Yavapai (Kendall 1980: 132) . • Traditional Piipaash customs prohibit using the names of living and (especially) deceased individuals (Spier 1933: 197-198) (hence I avoid using the mythic name here) . 2. The first syllable of xat lywe overlaps with the morpheme xat ‘dog’. • This is also true of the common name xat kuuly ‘wolf’. • It’s tempting to hypothesize that both xatlywe ‘coyote’ and xatkuuly ‘wolf’ are derived from xat ‘dog’. This might even explain why xatlywe is never extended to ‘dog’ in archival materials……… 10 10 5

7/13/2019 Hypothesis • I hypothesize that the common name xatlywe ‘coyote’ derives from historical reflexes of xat ‘dog’ and the verb lyvii - ‘be like, look like’. • That is, xatlywe more literally refers to something which ‘looks like a dog’. • Speakers combined these morphemes to form a new word which could have plausibly referred to any non-dog Canidae , and which they used to refer to the common ‘coyote’ in order to avoid using the mythic name. • The historical use of xatlywe for ‘fox, wolf’ reflects speakers’ sensitivity to the morphological composition of this word (these animals too look like a dog). • Over time, xatlywe became lexically frozen and narrowed in its scope, such that speakers now can only use it to mean ‘coyote’. 11 11 Evidence for xat ‘dog’ as a component of xatlywe • Dogs ( xaat ) were an important pet kept by the Piipaash (Spier 1933: 73-74) . • One of Spier’s consultants attested that dogs were in several senses human (hence their meat could not be eaten, unlike other animals kept as pets), and they could even appear in dreams in the form of humans (Spier 1933: 74; 254) . • Did Piipaash speakers use xat to derive other names? If so, it would make it more plausible that they also used xat to create xatlywe . • ny xat ‘pet’ ( ny - xat ‘ POSS - dog’) (Spier 1933: 73; Langdon 1978; Langdon et al. 1991) . • • xat kuuly ‘wolf’ (Spier 1946; Langdon et al. 1991) – Spier (1946: 106) hypothesizes that it means ‘bigger than a dog’, but I suspect that the second morpheme is kuly- ‘climb, go up’, making xatkuuly literally a ‘dog that climbs’. • txpa(sh) ‘ Akimel O’odham/Pima’ (Spier 1933: 7; Langdon et al. 1991) – I suspect that this is metathesized from * xt pa(sh) ( xt - pa - sh ‘dog -person- PL ’). • txpa xat ‘dog Pima’, another O’odham -speaking group (Spier 1933: 7) . 12 12 6